the guardian wears it cosseted, london-centric, middle-class prejudice on its cover at last

So what cool newspaper do you write for now? The Telegraph? The Daily Mail?

Welcome to Britain, 2005

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lottery/story/0,7369,1517055,00.html

I really fail to see what exactly about it has so offended Stelfox, except for the fact that he reacts with bitter bile out of all proportion whenever anything to do with the Guardian is mentioned.

x-post if the person himself refers to himself as "King of the Chavs" what is wrong with the Guardian repeating his own claim?

I'd like it if the Guardian called me Kate St.Claire, self styled Queen of Coo.

etc. etc. etc.

I've started none of these in the past week. Maybe I should.

Now, am I more offended by the assumptions made in the title of this thread than any and all uses of the word Chav for "lumpenproletariat".

about a year ago i went into a newsagents in hamilton and asked for one. the proprietor scowled at me and said: "no chance. the guardian is an ENGLISH paper!"

I envisaged Students Unions doing 'Chav Nights'.

WHAT'S WRONG WITH LIVING IN LONDON?!?!?!?

AND HOW IS THE GUARDIAN MORE OR LESS OBJECTIONABLE THAN ANY OTHER PAPER IN ENGLAND?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?

Oh God. Kill them all (except me, I'm too cute to die).

In Kate's defence, that was a parody thread.

I envisaged Students Unions doing 'Chav Nights'.

Urgh. I'm getting really upset at the asssimilation of 'Chav' culture into mainstream culture (but I'm making no judgement on the social/class connotations of the word).

neither can Michael Carroll, so why are they using the 'chav' label in this way if not as an insult?

*Apart from Alex Petridis articles, obviously.

Nothing. But you guys have your own newspapers, don't you?

Big Brother?

heheh. we englishmen in the scottish press need more hamilton newsagents like that.

as for the puff/headline in question: as flyboy says, the simple addition of inverted commas would have done a lot here. as other posters have pointed out, he is the self-styled king of chavs. so the puff should have put that in quotes, eg:

"the king of chavs" gets an asbo.

at the moment, i agree: it looks shockingly ugly and vindictive, and made me do a double-take.

( ;-) )

OK, clearly Carroll can't help where he was born or how he was educated, but anyone who actually believes that it's perfectly legal going around shooting ball bearings at random people's windows because he hadn't been caught NEEDS to be dealt with by the legal system. I don't know if "Chav" is automatically a synonym for criminal in his own self-description, but he certainly *is* a criminal.

even 'lumpenproletariat' instead of chav seems deconstructive and judgemental.,/i>

That's the Marxist term. From Marx. If the shoe fits, etc...

er, where's the adjective?

[/pedant]

All dachshunds are dogs, but not all dogs are dachshunds, etc.

Anyone who thinks that it automatically is, IHO, is the person with the classist attitude, not necessarily the person using the term.

However, I don't see the Guardian's usage as being quite in that class (ha ha!).

His criminality is not the issue. If a criminal who called himself "The king of n***ers" was convicted, would the Guardian repeat that in a headline without inverted commas on its front page?

"May" is a conditional term. Not a definitional term.

Seems a bit extremist to me.

i wanted to be smart here, but intriguingly, the guardian style guide contains no entry for n***er.

or chav.

It may unfortunately be a subset of Working Class, but not synonymous.
All dachshunds are dogs, but not all dogs are dachshunds, etc.

Arguably, nasty right-wing, reactionary language has evolved so that, where once you would have to explain that you don't think all members of a particular group are scum, just the ones who are, now derogatory terms have that built-in to them. It's as if "ho" somehow contained within itself the get-out excuse "oh, of course I'm not talking about all women - just the ones who are hos!". It's very sophisticated but no less hateful.

Anyone who thinks that it automatically is, IHO, is the person with the classist attitude, not necessarily the person using the term.

I don't understand this at all.

Either:

1) it is a derrogatory term for any and all members of the working class

2) it is a derrogatory term for a certain type of person sporting distinctive clothing and persuing undesirable/criminal activity (who may or may not be working class)

If it is the latter, then it's not a classist issue. But the people who claim that it's offensive and unmentionable seem to be the ones equating 1 and 2. Which is it?

Maths saves the day

I like that this was written by the same guy who called someone a spastic the other day.

search under 'Dave Stelfox' and 'Guardian' reveals a massive total of 964 published words - they must be reeling!

But missing spectacularly?

Tracksuit/Burberry (sp?) wearing hooligans come from all walks of life.

xposts galore

chavs came first though, but you're effectively right anyway.

while words such as "ned" and "spide" haven't evolved, "chav" seems to have been picked up and mangled by the media to the extent that a single definition is now an impossibility. and although i - personally - was shocked by the guardian's seemingly unthinking use of it, there's also an argument for saying: how can anyone seriously be offended by a word that has effectively lost all meaning and is all things to all people?

the over/mis-use of the word is really starting to piss me off, anyway.

One of the reasons 'chav' has been so successful as a buzzword is it's convenience and simplicity - one word, one syllable, one handy catch-all ready to go.

To Steve M above re chav not being black, I think the media representation of working class also means non-black. There seems to be an implication that traditional class boundaries and structures in the UK are just that, ones which only apply to "traditional English". This is of course absoulte nonsense.

What is particularly interesting about chav is the speed in which a derogatory term has been co-opted by those being insulted and then turned into potentially a tribal thing. This is not unusual, but for the turn around to be a matter of months is.

What is the Guardian style guides line of quotations in headlines, cos they seem realtively unusual. I certainly would not put King Of The "Chavs", though "King Of The Chavs" would be acceptible as we are quoting the man himself.

What mutation? Sorry, I'm not paying attention.

I think the meaning has been changed from [2] to [1] mainly by people with a classist agenda, on both sides. I.e. Daily Mail on one side, Julie Burchill on the other.

sums it up quite well I think.

xpost: I don't think I've ever seen 'ned' used to describe salt-of-the-earth working class types or their behaviour. Just wee bammery specifically.

My observation is merely that in all instances and abuses I've seen of the word 'chav' lately, it is always directed at southern caucasians who fit the working class stereotype(s). There may well be nothing in this at all, but I find it curious nonetheless.

Isn't this more to do with 'chav' coming from this background before it was co-opted by the mass-media, whereas the North has/had terms like 'ned' and 'scally'?

Funnily enough in the last big discussion about The Chav Phenomenon on ILE I referred to Only Fools & Horses then as well. It being the first time I'd hear the word 'chav' used (or 'chavvy' to be precise).

?!

As Pash says, this person's criminality seems to extend way past the "being vaguely theatening on the bus" watermark.

Again, as on the "junkies next door" thread, you can bray all you like about victims of the class system etc. blah blah but honestly when it comes down to it - do you think this person's behaviour is acceptible? And what do you do with a person whose behaviour has transgressed from unacceptible to criminal?

Sure, you can work to try and make Society As A Whole more equitable and fair so people are not tempted to turn to drugs/crime/etc. etc. etc. but that doesn't solve the immediate problem of someone who thinks that it is perfectly acceptible to drive around town shooting ball bearings.

Heavens.

what, all of them? that's the point: when everybody from victoria beckham to michael carroll by way of charlotte church is being labelled a chav, the word loses all meaning.

a criminal is a criminal no matter what their background. the problem here is the way the word "chav" is bandied about smugly by the middle-class media, who have completely lost sight of what it ever meant.

Are you calling these people WYP because they are "young, upwardly etc etc", or because they fit into the yuppie/Wall Street stereotype?

nb: i'm a fully paid-up member of the m-c media myself. i'm not being pejorative here.

What does the fact that someone thinks it is perfectly acceptible to drive around town shooting ball bearings have to do with what class he's from?

It DOESN'T!!! That's my point. He is Chav Type 2 if a Chav at all.

But you always get someone saying "oh, it's classist to call him a chav. And besides, he's only acting like that because he's working class and denied access to other methods of retribution for perceived wrongs (even though he's a millionaire now) because he is a victim of Thatcherism and not responsible for his own bad behaviour" blah blah blah, like *that* is not the most classist and patronising load of twaddle that gets tossed around on ILE.

(Please Note: Stereotypical viewpoints and rants of certain ILX0rs have been exaggerated for comedic and/or point-driving-home effect.)

I clearly misunderstand the term and its uses. I'm just getting my middle class back up about the rampant anti-middle classism in this whole thread.

If you always get it why aren't you getting it on this thread?

x-post. Rubbish, Dom.

Again, as on the "junkies next door" thread, you can bray all you like about victims of the class system etc. blah blah but honestly when it comes down to it - do you think this person's behaviour is acceptible?

Nobody has defended or condoned the individual in question's behaviour at all in this thread, as far as I can tell. "Hyper-sensitive" = the term always trotted out whenever anyone on any message board ever (ever ever) points out some racist/sexist/classist/homophobic language. It's PC gone mad!, and so on.

And what do you do with a person whose behaviour has transgressed from unacceptible to criminal?

Prosecute them, I imagine! Which hyper-sensitive Marxist has said otherwise?

Sure, you can work to try and make Society As A Whole more equitable and fair so people are not tempted to turn to drugs/crime/etc. etc. etc. but that doesn't solve the immediate problem of someone who thinks that it is perfectly acceptible to drive around town shooting ball bearings.

And the Guardian's use of the epithet 'chav' does help the problem?

xpost: Michael Carroll only thinks he is a chav/wants to be thought of as a chav. Is this enough to make him a chav?

xxpost: when everybody from victoria beckham to michael carroll by way of charlotte church is being labelled a chav, the word loses all meaning.

No, that's simply not true. Can you not see the links between these people? One is that they have WC backgrounds, but it's more that they revel in it (brown sauce on the dinner table), despite having wealth, influence etc etc. The word will have lost all meaning when Stephen Fry is a chav.

xpost are my answers too short?

OTM. Note that we are a whisker away from the "you'd call them chavs too if you had to live near them!" argument, which is directly parallel to the "these PC liberals wouldn't like asylum seekers so much if they had to live with them!" argument.

Not short enough! Only kidding grouty!

you need to read up on yer vicky adams, mate. her father might have been WC, but she sure as fuck wasn't.

christ.. in the time it took me to read and write that, 20 ppl replied! either i'm really slow or this is the hottest of hot topics

You mean the fact that they are surrounded by middle class wankers all day? Only kidding!

a lot of people do do this though. some see it as one of the main factors in determining who is and isn't working/middle. or at least they did until the 90s and we sometimes experience echoes from before then. not that i agree with it.

I'm hoping it'll pwn the NYC Hipsters&Gays thread soon enough.

the issue is that this word has come to be used as a catch-all term for young working-class people

Says you. To these ears, chav and yob are virtually synonyms, except one is burberry-tinged.

x-post: WC is a state of mind ... i'll leave the rest of the wolves to tear you apart for that one :)

No, I'm not. I'm saying "criminality is criminality, regardless of class".

This person is not Bad because he is a chav/working class/whatever - he is Bad because he is acting in a criminal and dangerous manner.

I *don't* extend that assumption to all members of any class.

The word "chav" and The Guardian as an entity have flagged up Dave's rabid reaction of class issues. Which in term flag up my rabid reaction of refusing to apologise for What Class I Am.

I think that deep down Dave and I are agreeing on our annoyance at a phenomenon within the media (i.e. the word "Chav" is being misused) - but when it comes to class prejudices, you cannot fight fire with fire.

Apparently it is directly parallel to the "these PC liberals wouldn't like asylum seekers so much if they had to live with them!" argument, Noodle V. :-/

I'm probably wrong in what I said about neds above, it was just the way I saw it when I was in Scotland for three days last year and spun through a few papers. But chav has seemed to envelope neds, schemies etc etc.

*Or been defined by the media, which as establish up-thread is generally a middle-class playground which allows, say, Julie Burchill to do equally simplistic and daft class proclaimations from the other side.

but these are fundamental desires shared by everyone in our society so i don't seem them as noteworthy attributes of a class of people as they're so generic and transcendental.

What are the traditional economic and/or cultural indicators of class?
-Occupation?
-Education level?
-Property Ownership?
-Accent?
-Family Background?
-Cultural signifiers such as the newspaper you read, what sport you follow, what arts you support?

I suppose the obvious answer is, it doesn't actually matter what class you are, so it doesn't matter if there is a disparity between any of those (and other signifiers). It's the *self*-description of people who go to great lengths to say that they are *working* rather than *middle* class which perplex me.

absolutely spot-on. being smart and having a relatively decent job does not make my roots any less working-class. it just makes me bloody grateful to my parents.

In places like South Africa and parts of America, race *is* class.

In other places, class is a fairly fluid concept, more related to economic issues rather than cultural ones.

Growing up part of the exploited class might be different in different countries, but I can't think of one place where there are no cultural differences between the rich and the poor. Also, what Dom just said.

I don't see what is rabid or unique about his reaction. The vast majority of my friends consider "chav" to be a form of hatespeech.

Which in term flag up my rabid reaction of refusing to apologise for What Class I Am.

Who has asked you to apologise for What Class You Are?

The very subject of this thread.

But that's exactly what screams out at you from every form of media, from government etc etc day in day out

Why was the knee-jerk reaction of ILX often, when responding to a (perhaps) classist (anti-working class) statement, to slam back with a classist (anti-middle class) statement.

You can't fight one kind of racism with another kind of racism. So don't try to fight classism with a different kind of classism. That makes you no better than the "classist media" you are deriding.

"I'm not saying Middle Class is better, I'm just saying I'm proud to be Middle Class" - you got a problem if someone says that, then?

Possibly. What's being ignore here inevitably is existing power structures - which is why "where's the affirmative action for white people?" isn't too far off.

Something to do with relative power and influence perhaps?

So this explodes to using cosseted, london-centric, middle-class as an insult.

Cue 500 new answers by morning.

Try buying the Guardian on the weekend. This 'left-wing' newspaper is then filled with crappy lifestyle supplements telling you how wonderful and important it is to be middle-class!

Are you kidding? Buy property! Sell property! Keep taxes low! Individualism over collectivism! I'm getting bored with this now...

Those are adjectively terms describing the prejudice! Do you have a similar problem with the term "white racism" or "male sexism"?

Let's think about all the threads that could be solved with an analogous answer...

Ah, the 'argument' that if someone doesn't like something, they can just ignore it, and should not waste time critiquing it on the internet. The embrace of this rhetorical device is like that of a dear old friend.

I agree.

So why do so many of the working class persist in going on about their pride in being so very working class? ;-(

This is getting tiresome. I'm so annoyed by this whole thread I'm off to default the mortgages of several thousand working class Northern families JUST BECAUSE I CAN, mwah hah hah hah.

Steady on...

I think it means that the idea of such things being class-owned belongs back in the 20th century.

Because getting a decent job usually means mingling with a load of Middle Class gits.

I think if you care at all about how right-wing and reactionary the media is in the UK these, it's perfectly understandable to feel angry at the Guardian with every little betrayal, even though there have been so many of them by now.

Is the "very" signnificant here?

Because getting a decent job usually means mingling with a load of Middle Class gits.

Oh, no there's been no insulting the middle class on this thread at all. Don't get all condescending because you just don't understand OUR CULTURE!!!

This is what I was saying earlier, I think..... adding to the general petty, mean-spiritedness of the media and, unfortunately, Britain as a whole is not to be defended

I do think this thread is banging at several cross purposes where the salient facts that we all agree on are:
a) This headline is a bit dodgy, could do with quotes
b) the title of this thread is also a bit dodgy, itself being class
c) the UK class system is a minefield and makes little sense which is potentially one of the reasons it persists albeit weakened.
d) that there will always be bullies who pick on the other, be they poor, working class, middle class. And these bullies almost define their own divides for their own ends.

x-post

Britain loves a loser?

The Guardian is perceived as having been left-wing and progressive, traditionally. Perhaps this perception is in error. Therefore it is at best disappointing and at worse enraging when it resorts the to unthinking use of (okay, let's not say class, let's say) derogatives based on culture and status.

Excellent, now this thread has reached that inevitable stage where people say things that can answered by cutting and pasting from things that were typed earlier!

Existing power structures. Media screaming. Sunday supplements. Yada yada yada.

Middle Class Pride = Nice Rhododendron bush

xpost x3

Actually, I lie - I am Warrior Class.

Kate = Drone!

(Try espousing classic Upper Middle/Landed Gentry Victorian attitudes such as "it takes a gentleman to wear an old coat" in an environment like Fairfield County, Connecticut.)

I've spent much of my life being vaguely disgusted by and trying to *escape* my own class background, but really you can't escape into Bohemianism or anything else without being derrided for being a "trustafarian" or having the old "Common People" thing thrown at you. Plus, it *is* so much a cultural thing that you cannot really escape.

So in many ways, it's ironic that I spend so much time on ILX feeling like I have to *defend* Being Middle Class. And weirdly, it's the only place where I ever *have* felt like I have to defend or apologise for my background or class.

By my own criteria above, I might no longer even *be* economically middle class (well, up to accepting this job, that is). I don't own property, I didn't finish university, I have been subsisting below the poverty level for the past 2 years. But culturally I am *not* working class and never will be. So where am I supposed to fit?

Perhaps my apologies for the Middle Class come from the same sense of disparity as those "yuppie working class" who cannot recconcile their economic class to their cultural class. But I have as much of a right to *my* cultural identity as you have to yours.

Anyway, I am sure that by the time this is posted, the thread will have moved on to slinging one-liner insults and this will be completely out of place.

http://img14.imgspot.com/u/05/179/11/HyacinthBouquet.jpg Vs. http://img14.imgspot.com/u/05/179/11/0207kua.jpg

xp.

Is pride not synonomous with the compulsion to defend or apologise though? Perhaps not, I don't really want to personalise this argument though.

You don't have to feel pride in order to want to say "hey, don't pick on that, I can't help what I am".

That's a really ugly chip on your shoulder. Hiding behind the a priori prejudical working class "moral high ground" to slag off a social construct which by definition *can't* share this moral high ground is pure cowardice - well, cowardice with a bit of pointless malice stirred in.

(I'm about as middle class as is possible. I couldn't be anything else in a million years. It's not affected, it's not aspirational, it's what I am. So what gives him the right to abuse me, Kate and several million others (some of whom AREN'T "gits", or "wankers") for something we have no control over?)

No.

But yeah, I am all about pointless malice.

And again, this had... what?... to do with this thread, intially?

And if a working class person made the same statement on this board how would that go down? I can hear the guffaws from here. But but you have a university degree! But but you have a good job! But but you're fairly well-read and cultured! But but but...

Constant snidey pettiness may not be "hate" but it ugly, unnecessary and leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Do you really want me to go and copy and paste all the "middle class git" comments from this thread?

And I didn't bring pride into the discussion - someone accused me of "middle class pride" simply for trying, again and again, to point out, either jokingly or seriously that reverse classism is not a good tool with which to fight classism.

x-post

Dada, it's a totally straightforward statement, unloaded with anything you're trying to read into it. Why's it funny? Why's it *bad*?

With the reverse pointed out, I can see the point of it now.

A Middle Class person displaying their sense of humour, today.

(problem is I don't even know Working Class stereotypes enough to make stupid jokes about them)

One of the big problems with working class apolgists (especially those of us who probably do fit more in the middle class) is that there are large swathes of working class people, who shock -ULP- are not left wing and progressive. The Daily Mail has an awful lot of working class readers.

Who has said this? Is this supposed to be a representation of what I've said, because if so, it's way off the mark.

I agree that the cous cous and rocket gags are unhelpful, but I don't see why there's a need for the middle classes to be defended. I'm middle class. I'm also very aware of the privilege that grants me. I no more feel the need to stick up for the middle-classes in this debate than I do to listen to Minor Threat's 'Guilty Of Being White'.

There's a phrase for them - class traitors!

It's classist because most of the affectations and entertainment associated with the culture are cheap and often immature (property damage, blowing things up, etc).

It's not necessarily inconsistent, until the point at which the Guardian starts to a) actively promote a lifestyle of middle-class affluence* at every opportunity, and simultaneously b) denigrate the "chavs".

*I'd actually go further and argue that the lifestyle promoted in the lifestyle supplements of the Guardian is now beyond the means of all but the upper-upper-middle-classes...

And I think it isn't

Prob'ly true, but Roland Barthes wrote that great essay about how the recipes in some magazines were meant to be aspirational porn rather than things the readers would cook. I think a lot of lifestyle journalism is like that.

And on that note, me and my class issues are going down the Freemasons Arms to discuss our takeover of the Western World's banking system with the rest of my class.

sounds otm to me.

Saying that there's nothing intrinsically bad about being middle class has nothing to do with pride; I just don't see how you jump from acceptance of what you are to being proud of what you are.

both of them are as vague as "chav" seems to have become

the hardcore marxist terms are:
1. bourgeoisie
2. petty bourgeoisie
3. proletariat
4. lumpenproletariat

these are not really exhaustive as regards their technical definition (though 2 and 4 are often used in a sloppy and catch-all way) (inc. by unapologetic marxists who ought to know better)

middle class is often taken to constitute !&2 combined: it doesn't
working class is often taken to constitute 3&4 combined: it doesn't

i am a self-employed freelance sub-editor:
this makes me
A2 (acc.health insurance etc)
bourgeois (i run my own company = me)
petty bourgeois (i employ no one)
middle class: the topic of my magazine is arts & leisure & luxury-related
working class (my employment is hire-and-fire at a day's notice

at the magazine, my job is rewriting and tinkering with the contributions of other freelancers = i have power they don't, and consider my role to be to use this to accord w.the whims and tastes of my boss) - in this sense. i am management's packrat

it would be a bit silly to describe me as proletarian, given my ambiguous status - and the non-industrial nature of the industry i work in (i'm a technician, not shopfloor, but there IS no shopfloor), but in its proper sense - aware of my broader working-class interests and prepared to take collective action to see them realised, should the opportunity ever arise (fat chance where i actually currently work) - i am certainly a fellow traveller, albeit an annoyingly easily bored and mocking cultural aristocrat of a fellow traveller

i have never crossed a picket line

my parents worked for an educational charity:
hence the culture i inherited was mainly middle-class: the charity aimed (aims) to provide science educational opportunities - largely access to rural fieldwork experience - to children and students schooled in cities; from the outset my dad - and for a while my mum also - worked at the managerial level (though dad taught a lot early on also)

since i lived in london my social cultura has been:
i. urban mediaworkers claiming all kinds of difft class backgrounds (=you soppy lot, as like as peas for all yr noise)
ii. 20-plus years living in a quiet class-mixed square in the second-poorest borough in london, 50 yards from a street widely known as "murder mile"

i am proud of my parents; also of my own career so far

the manchester guardian has been unreadably bad for as long as i can remember: my life has been immeasurbly better since i stopped reading newspapers - i am less prone to needless depression and rage, and i know more about what's going on in the world

Not moral obligation, but it would be nice if you gave just a little for your hair to make rudimentary wigs for those balder (and, therefore, more unfortunate) than yourself.

Amen.

T-Rex, A Beard of Stars

Sheer genius!

The Guardian goes tab in the autumn, so the old 'broadsheet = middle class' argument will soon fade away.

Haha, wait, he didn't actually resign *over this*, tho!

xp2- It might be 'legitimate' but it's bollocks. To a large extent education exists to provide a bargain babysitting service for working parents. That's what my missus says and she should know, being a teacher and a fucking good one too. You're thinking of the fifties, an age before asbos and pop music and internets and cunts who walk around in tracksuit bottoms all day. Have they no self respect?

"The Clash - Thinking Man's Yobs"

it didn't make me cancel my subscription.

nimbly sidestepping the dreary and predictable trolling on this thread: the guardian has always been like this. it has never not been like this. i only read it because there was no competition. now with the internet etc. why bother with newspapers at all?

as to the middle class working class pride thing, doesnt this equate to:

WC: i got here on my own merit, without losing sight of where i came from, i havent abandoned the stuff that got me here, and the people left behind, to beecome someone else

MC: i was already here

hence, sometime MC lack of confidence observed. self-confidence vs....what?

Yes, yes, 'likeliest victims', very good... "wait until your daughter is raped by an Albanian immigrant, then we'll see how much you like them!"

See, when we first moved to America, my parents used to have the Guardian airmailed over as some kind of cultural link - and eventually as more reliable newsource than most American papers. It's part of my cultural baggage and heritage. So I will continue to buy it at the weekend for an enjoyable Saturday afternoon read.

However, I do see your point. Since I've been riding the bus, I've been reading a lot of newspapers over people's shoulders. And it's odd how *aware* of become of the specific bias of each paper - to the point where I can tell what a person is reading from the headlines, even if I can't see the small print at the top of the page saying what it is.

Last night in the pub, I finally put my finger on exactly what about this thread and its title bothered me - but the insight has worn off with the hangover.

I think it was somehow along the lines of... what the Guardian is guilty of is using the word Chav. How dare the Guardian be so Tabloidy! So insensitive! So scare-mongering, so quick to jump on the latest buzzwords! ("Chav" and "ASBO" are current attention grabbers getting overused.)

Of all those things, the Guardian may be guilty of, depending on the potential offensiveness of the word "Chav".

But WHAT ON EARTH does using an offensive word (even in its original and "proper" use as a thuggish person) have to do with Being Middle Class, Being London-based and Being "Cosseted"?

If you want to declare a "use other words" moratorium on "Chav" then please also follow a "use other words" moratorium on the use of "Middle Class" as an insult.

Anyway, I don't know what The Guardian did to Stelfox to justify all this bile. Maybe it's just envy because he'd secretly *like* to be a crack left-wing, liberal reporter for the Guardian and they won't let him. ;-)

(1) Along with feeling smug about being middle class, exploiting the working classes and voting Tory, all on the middle class nation curiculum it would seem.

(2)Is not so, the best origami-ist I know was much more working class that even me.

*Actually only this one, but I am sensing a more satircial bent to this thread this morning.

(and before anyone starts, I'm half-Jewish, OK?)

Is this NEW?

I can confirm that I have certainly never been a member of the Monday Club.

However, I confess that in my youth I was a member of the Glasgow Rhythm Club.

so i do think its new to an extent, it may be argued that students in the past became increasingly MOR in views, post-graduation, or that there was mere pretense to non-MOR views in the past. but even if these are true, that doesnt seem to be the case today, where even the pretence is absent.

the student stereotype today is surely as perhaps the most apolitical sector of society

as for the thread topic, isn't this just the Guardian's usual clumsy attempt to not be a stuffy broadsheet? like they feel they have to fight fire with fire or something.

Alison, it's increasingly been 'okay' to tar women with the chav brush according to their dress sense, the behaviour of their children, or their perceived sexual habits; 'anti-social' is becoming a snidey term itself for people who would be ashamed to use the word 'chav'.

There was a large majority of people who fitted somewhere on a continuum of backgrounds from v.poor through to very comfortable. Most people I met couldn't give a shit about yr 'background'. I think that's the case now.

Has the demographic changed? From what to what? More people go to Univ now - are these proportionally more I know that in my day students had more time for activism etc, because you didn't need a bloody job as well.

a) hey and I work with them
is somewhat temptered by they
b) I work at SOAS which has always been atypically political.

there are no excuses on this: if you're takin the pay of a commissioning editor, do yr fuckin job --- the way marcello wz treated wz a disgrace (of course as i'm sorta partly responsible for the fuck-up, i feel doubly furious abt it)

xp- Stelfox- I can't imagine how horrible the Guardian must be if it's worse to work for than the Independent. The Indie's problems have less to do with finance and more to do with manners, or lack of.